|Home||American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections|
|Anonymous User (login or join us)|
Macro Man -
Subject: Watson's Magazine August-September 1915
I read Watson's Magazine August and September 1915 as suggested. I find it impossible to come to any other conclusion that Frank committed the murder of Phagan. There is no doubt in my mind there was an ugly-dirty moneyed conspiracy to help him skirt justice back then that refuses to gather dust. God Bless Saint Mary Anne Phagan Martyr of Christian Southern Womanhood.
Subject: spoiler alert
the spoiler is the entire long winded 29 day 1913 trial can be reduced to one single moment. Leo Frank made a "woopsy daisy" confession blunder during his murder trial on August 18, 1913. he attempted to counter the testimony of Monteen Stover, by saying he was in the metal room going to the bathroom. It was the first time in US history the defendant made a virtual confession at his own murder trial. Leo Frank might be book smart, but he isn't to bright.
Subject: Tom Watson, August, 1915
This was published the Month Leo Frank got lynched (August 17, 1915) and if you read this specific issue of Tom Watson's Magazine you will learn how Leo Frank subverted justice. You can also learn about the Leo Frank murder confession he made on the witness stand on August 18, 1913 with an "unconscious" bathroom visit to the metal room. How many times in US history has someone made a murder confession at their own criminal trial?
Be sure to read Tom Watson's interpretation of the August 18, 1913, Leo Frank murder confession, which was originally articulated by State's Prosecution attorneys Frank Arthur Hooper and Hugh Dorsey at the Leo Frank Trial in late August 1913 (see the closing arguments of prosecution lawyers in American State Trials Volume X 1918 by John D. Lawson LLD)
Each of these 5 issues starting with January 1915 gets better and more unique when you read them in chronological order, with the best issues being August, September and October 1915.
Don't miss their unique perspectives on the Leo Frank trial.
If you read all five of these 1915 works by Tom Watson on the Leo Frank trial you will learn about the hidden truths inside and out and things left out by Leo Frank partisans of this case. The whole point of the Frankites is to make ad hominem attacks on Tom Watson, so that you do not consider his crystal clear lucid writing.
After you download these five 1915 PDF by Watson, upload them to other free online libraries and share them with people you know interested in the Leo Frank case.
Subject: The subversion is when facts are ignored or made up in the service of bigotry
So sad that this is still going on - The previous reviewer says Leo Frank subverted justice -- imagine what he would have said if Frank wasn't lynched after being wrongly imprisoned for years? The bigotry of the source material (Tom Watson's) and the anti-semitic rants from the guy who posted these long diatribes against Frank on this site caused me to look into the actual history of this case. Family members of the prosecutor, associates of Tom Watson, descendants of Georgia officials at the time -- they all admit to how bias and prejudice railroaded an innocent man. Why is this one guy who's posted all this garbage all over this site championing bigots? Why is he so bigoted himself?
Subject: Why are we being asked to ignore the fact that the sole source of this stuff was a bigot?
Tom Watson, the source of the so-called objective analyses of the Frank case, was a bigot by his own writing. In his publication, the Jeffersonian, in plainly anti-semitic writings, he inflamed and incited. He ignored evidence that supported Frank's innocence, made up other evidence, counted innuendo and rumor as fact, bullied and threatened the jurors ---- and for some reason, the guy who's posted all this garbage loves him. (Oh, by the way, Watson also was directly responsible for the lynching, which all these "reviews" totally whitewash.) He also was responsible for a resurgence of the KKK.
Subject: Sad, that Tom Watson is being portrayed as anything but a bigot
It's really astounding that there are these folks pretending that Tom Watson was just some objective analyst of this case. He was not. He was a first-class bigot, who used his platform in the Jeffersonion publication to spew anti-semetic, anti-catholic, anti-black, pro KKK poison. There is a reason why most folks today believe Leo Frank was innocent - Watson and the prosecutor made up evidence, suppressed other evidence, based a prosecution on innuendo and prejudice, bullied and threatened witnesses and jury members --- and then, when Frank's death sentence was commuted, incited his lynching! Watson was a bigot who these modern day bigots are touting as some kind of academic scholar. A previous reviewer may be right - the language may be the same as modern day commentary. That is a sad comment in and of itself.
Subject: Best Leo Frank book ever
This is the best book on the Leo Frank case concerning the brutal rape and murder a 13 year old girl named Mary Phagan. Leo Frank, president of B'nai B'rith was charged and convicted of this sickening crime because of the overwhelming evidence against him. After the conviction, Leo Frank tried to escape justice by using the power and influence of wealthy Jewish media magnates. This book includes all the evidence most other books intentionally leave out.
Subject: A solid Review of the Facts
Leaving aside the rhetoric surrounding the case, we see here a good view of what probably was a dissenting / majority view of the infamous Leo Frank murder trial.
For those with a negative view of this article, it's fair to point out that this doesn't read much different than political commentaries of today.
Subject: Bigotry begets bigotry
So, now we're getting closer to who this guy is who posts all this stuff celebrating Tom Watson - who was a bigot by his own documentation (please, check out his writings and you'll see what I mean). And it's no wonder he's fixated on Watson's bigoted rants and lies about a 100-year old murder case. Judging from some of his comments, he claims that anyone who points out Watson was a KKK-supporting, anti-semite, anti-Catholic, anti-black bigot (which he proudly says in his own writings) is like a "Jew who says Jesus was a Jew-hater". I don't even get that logic. But, it's revealing. He likes Watson because he himself is 100 years behind the times. Well, at least this time it's his own bigotry on display, now Watson's.
Subject: Consider the source, please!
It's not a knee-jerk reaction to consider the source of the information you're reading. In this case the source is Tom Watson over and over again, in multiple posts on this site. Is it reasonable to believe that a person (Watson) whose writings supported the KKK, vilified Catholics, and spread hatred for Jews is the best source for facts in a 100 year old murder case involving a Jew? Is it reasonable to believe legal arguments from someone who called for and then celebrated a man's lynching? I'm baffled by why the poster of these materials and reviews is on this crusade of hatred against Frank and urges us to ignore the source's (Watson's) proudly stated bigotry. In many of his posts on this site, his reviews of the "fairness" of Watson's analysis are peppered with casually inserted phrases of conspiracy theories involving Jews. He's moderated the language in some of the posts - and removed other posts with revolting statements about the lynching being Frank's own fault - but the prejudice remains. Why does he want to hide his source's true beliefs? (It's easy enough to find out what Watson believed about the KKK, Catholics and Jews -- just Google his writings!)
Subject: You need to consider the source - bigoted
Right, the fact that Tom Watson was a KKK supporter, and wrote violent anti-Catholic and anti-semitic articles has nothing to do with his integrity and believability, huh? This 100-year old case is dragged up over and over in postings on this site, and we're not supposed to consider the prejudices of the source? Oh, and by the way, when someone says "it's no wonder" someone gets lynched, it reveals a lot about them.
Subject: Leo Frank did it
The article clearly shows that Leo Frank was not deprived of any defense during the two years of his trial but instead had his defense extended thanks to a corrupt governor. The people of the South were not naturally anti-semitic until Leo Frank got cocky and raped an innocent 13 year old girl.
Subject: The source of this is a KKK supporting anti semitic, anti-Catholic bigot
Here's another posting trying to portray Tom Watson as a serious analyst of the Leo Frank case. He was not. He was a bigot who supported the KKK, was wildly anti-semitic and bitterly anti-Catholic. He incited for then celebrated the lynching of Frank. He was bigot, plain and simple. Why he is being posted all over this site as an objective analyst of a 100-year old murder with no reference to his bigotry is a mystery to me. But some of the titles of his articles, with terms like "Jew Pervert" and "Rich Jews Indict State" may give you a clue.
|Ocr:||ABBYY FineReader 8.0|
|Rights:||No longer in copyright, download and distribute.|